outhouse

Quite normal for mortal Romans.


Dreams, visions and hallucinations were seen and interpreted as real events.

Not eating could very well cause anyone to see evil.

Miracles are a lot like magic.

This is all about the ignorance of the common peasant.

For the performer of magic, there is no trick, no miracle. But for the observer a miracle or magic happens. Same thing would apply to someone who knew how to heal. Only exaggerated



Done that myself after a bottle of jack.



Cut up one fish for bait, and one could catch many fish.



walking in shallow water




Spiritual resurrection



Common for the poor



Was known to be a handworker



wanted a roof over his head and a meal, was worth more then money for the poor and hungry. And wouldn't be taxed feeding the Roman machine he hated.



Little is said of either, since the focus was on him.



he could have screamed at the top of his lungs, and probably did.

But his crime had a punishment that didn't even need a trial.






And heaven forbid that ancient men wrote in allegory, metaphors and mythology and parables.

ApostateAbe

Those are all attributes of an amazing human being, not from a modern perspective but from the perspective of ancient people. They are not out of line with the characters of Moses, Elijah, Zoroaster and Apollonius of Tyana, each thought to be an amazing human being. If the Gospel of Mark portrays Jesus as a human being--walking, talking, eating and living like a human being--is there really any reason to think Jesus per Mark is anything but an amazing human being? Especially since a quote from Jesus per Mark makes it explicit that he is not God? I like to make sense of texts, because making sense of texts helps us determine probable intentions. If bringing in a lot of speculations turns sense into nonsense, then maybe the speculations can be put to the side.

aa5874

ApostateAbe seems not to understand that in the NT, indeed in the very Bible, that there were non-human characters that were Evil.

Satan is regarded as a figure of history by Christians even today.

Satan is regarded as Evil.

It is not logical at all that the Jesus character must be human if it is claimed that Only God is Good.

Even Angels, non-human characters, have been cast out of heaven.

Even Angels, non human characters, were Evil.

Examine what Revelation Reads.


Revelation 12

Steven Carr

So what you are saying is that when Ehrman claims early Christians believed Jesus was a human being and then later his persona became more heavenly, he is now forced to the conclusion that the exact opposite was true - Paul regarded him as a pre-existing heavenly being and by the time we get to Mark he has become an ordinary human being.

Toto

I hope you do not think that the book of Exodus is evidence for a historical Moses.

There are quite a few parallels between Jesus and Moses. I would classify both as legendary figures rather than amazing historical figures.

The text makes a lot of sense as a theological allegory with no historical content. It doesn't make a lot of sense as history.

I have no idea what you mean by bringing in a lot of speculations.

ApostateAbe

No, actually I didn't say anything about any of that.

ApostateAbe

Well, don't get the wrong idea of what I am saying. Whether or not Moses was historical is not relevant. Whether or not Jesus was historical isn't even relevant. The point right now is the model of Jesus per the gospel of Mark. I am saying that the character of Moses was both a human being and someone who performed a lot of miraculous deeds, same as the characters of Jesus, Elijah, Zoroaster and Apollonius of Tyana. You are saying that the miraculous deeds of Jesus per Mark indicates that Jesus was more than just an amazing human being, having some sort of divine character. Not only does this not fit the human profile of Jesus drawn by Mark, but Mark 10:18 speaks to the perfect contrary. It isn't too late to adjust your position about the character of Jesus per Mark. Remember, I am not asking you to believe that Jesus was historical.

aa5874

You have merely presumed that gMark accounts of Jesus are historical. There is no evidence whatsoever that any deeds or words of Jesus are true.

May I remind you that the Angel Gabriel did speak to Mary in gLuke and that Satan the Devil spoke to Jesus the Son of God when they both were on the pinnacle of the Temple in the Temptation.


It is extremely clear that the Jesus stories are Myth Fables about Gods, Son of Gods, Holy Ghosts, Angels, Devils, Evil Spirits, Resurrection and Ascensions.

The words of God, Satan, Demons, the Holy Ghost, Angels and Jesus have zero historical value.

Steven Carr

No, you didn't say anything like that because those are the facts of the case.

aa5874

Well, your argument for an historical Jesus is irrelevant once you admit it does not matter if Jesus was historical.


If Moses, Elijah, Zoroaster and Apollonius of Tyana were fictitious characters it does NOT matter if they were described as human. Fictitious characters are non-historical.

Secondly, the existence or non-existence of Moses, Elijah, Zoroaster, and Apollonius needs a separate and independent inquiry and the result cannot be transferred to the inquiry of the nature of Jesus in the NT.

Essentially, it is illogical to assert that if Moses existed that Jesus of Nazareth must also exist.

Adam and Eve were described as humans in Genesis but are Myths.

Romulus was described as human in Plutarch's Romulus but is a Myth.

Jesus was described as a Transfiguring Water walker in gMark.

Jesus is not only a Myth but Non-human.

Jesus in the NT was pure unadulterated mythology.